#WorkforceWednesday®: Staples Sued Over MA’s Lie Detector Notice, NJ’s Gender-Neutral Dress Code, 2024 Voting Leave Policies - Employment Law This Week®
DE Under 3: AI Revolution is Now Here with Major Ramifications
DE Under 3: Court Held That Workday Was an “Agent” to Employers Licensing its AI Applicant Screening Tools
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast - Episode 24: Young Professionals and The Emerging Workforce with Kamber Parker
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast - Episode 22: Compensation Programs with Carrie Cavanaugh of Find Great People
Employment Law Now VIII-144 – Current AI Regulatory Landscape and Employer Best Practices
DE Under 3: An Explanation of the Current Federal Budget Bill Confusion
DE Under 3: Four Things Recruiters Should Take Away from Our “Year-over-Year” Unemployment Pool Comparison Charts
Protecting Off-Duty Cannabis Use in California: What Employers Should Know
DE Under 3: Complaint Dismissed Alleging an Applicant Screening Tool Discriminated Based on Race, Age, & Disability
DE Under 3: Conservative Activist Group Filed OFCCP Complaints, Alleging Major Airlines' DEI Programs Violated Federal Contracts
DE Talk Podcast | Navigating the AI Landscape in Recruitment Marketing
DE Talk | A Focus On Veterans: Supporting Compliance, Recruitment, Candidate Experience & Beyond
The Risks in Background Checks
DE Under 3: EEOC Settled Its First Lawsuit Alleging AI Hiring Discrimination
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 404: Staying in Your Lane in the Job Hunt (w/Sadie Jones)
#WorkforceWednesday: New York City Employers Prepare for AI Bias Law - Employment Law This Week®
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 378: When to Start the 2L Job Hunt (w/Sadie Jones)
Podcast: California Employment News - Pay Transparency Coming to California
California Employment News: Pay Transparency Coming to California
The U.S. Supreme Court just issued its much-awaited religious discrimination decision in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch, 575 U.S. ___ (June 1, 2015) (No. 14-86). Samantha Elauf applied for a job with A&F and was denied the job...more
Federal anti-discrimination laws (“Title VII”) prohibit an employer from refusing to hire a candidate to avoid accommodating a suspected, but unconfirmed religious practice, according to a recent United States Supreme Court...more
Employer’s Motive, Not Confirmed Knowledge Of Accommodation Need, Is Basis Of Religious Accommodation Violation - Federal anti-discrimination laws (“Title VII”) prohibit an employer from refusing to hire a candidate to...more
On June 1, 2015, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores in which it held that a job applicant can experience religious discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act...more
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) prohibits employers from, among other things, refusing to hire an applicant because of his or her religion or religious practice. As a general rule, employers must...more
In a case Justice Antonin Scalia described as “really easy,” the Supreme Court held that an employer can be liable for failing to accommodate a religious practice even if the employer lacks actual knowledge of a need for an...more
On Monday, June 1, 2015, the United States Supreme Court reversed a judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit which had granted Abercrombie & Fitch (“Abercrombie”) summary judgment in a religious...more
Last week, in EEOC. v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., the Supreme Court addressed religious accommodations under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The background of the case dates to 2008. A young woman...more
On June 1, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court, in an 8-1 decision, ruled in favor of a 17-year-old practicing Muslim, Samantha Elauf, who applied for a job at retailer Abercrombie & Fitch, but was denied employment because the...more
The U.S. Supreme Court recently held that an employer cannot escape liability for religious discrimination under Title VII by arguing that it did not have actual knowledge of an individual's need for a religious...more
On Monday, June 1, the Supreme Court decided a religious discrimination case involving Abercrombie & Fitch and the EEOC. The Court held that "[a]n employee may not make an applicant's religious practice, confirmed or...more
The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc. resulted in an expected outcome but provided an unexpectedly small amount of practical guidance for employers. ...more
Yesterday, in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., 575 U.S. ___ (2015), the Supreme Court of the United States held that an applicant does not need to inform an employer of her need for a religious accommodation in order...more
The U.S. Supreme Court sided with the EEOC today and clarified the standard for religious accommodation and disparate-treatment claims under Title VII. The Court ruled that an applicant can advance a disparate-treatment claim...more
Monday, in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc. the Supreme Court held that making employment decisions based on assumptions related to religion (or any other protected class for that matter) can trigger liability under...more
The U.S. Supreme Court has held that to prevail in a Title VII disparate-treatment (i.e., intentional discrimination) claim, a job applicant need only show that his need for a religious accommodation was a motivating factor...more
On June 1, 2015, the United States Supreme Court decided Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., No. 14-86, holding that to prevail in a disparate-treatment claim based on religion under...more
An employer’s obligation to raise the issue of potential accommodations for religious discrimination under Title VII will soon receive clarification, as the U.S. Supreme Court is set to hear E.E.O.C. v. Abercrombie & Fitch...more
Sometime next year the United States Supreme Court will decide whether a job interviewer had an obligation to inform an applicant that the interviewer has noticed that the applicant is wearing a headscarf. Put another way, on...more